Disparate Impact

Texas v. Inclusive Communities will test the principle of Disparate Impact in the Supreme Court

US
Supreme Court, disparate
impact
and the Inclusive Communities caseOn Jan 21, 2015 the US
Supreme Court heard the case of Texas Department of Housing
and Community Affairs vs. The Inclusive Communities Project. Texas argues that
there's no proof of "intent to discriminate" and so there's
no discrimination. Advocates point
out that intent is not
necessary where the discrimination is cooked into the system
of business as usual.
Advocates call this
"structural" or "systemic" discrimination.

"Disparate impact" is a term in law that means
analyzing a program or policy which appears "neutral" to
determine if the program or policy has a bad outcome for members of a
protected class.In Dallas, Low Income Housing Tax Credit developments were customarilyplaced into areas of high poverty concentration. Inclusive Communities Project and individualAfrican
American families sued under the Fair Housing Act, claiming that they
were denied the opportunity to move to predominantly
white communities (with better schools, less crime and more
employment) because there was no affordable housing in those
communities. The families won their case (and the appeal) based on
the principle of disparate impact, namelythat the practice of locatinggovernment funded
housing in segregated communitieskept them in a segregated setting. Dallas amended their plan
to selecting sites for affordable housing, but then the State of Texas, which issued the Federal credits, appealed to the
US Supreme Court.

An
adverse decision will deprive Fair Housing advocates of a key tool
in fighting discrimination. After 50 years of Fair Housing law,
housing providers have become more subtle in the ways in which they
deny housing to members of protected classes. You don't see
"no children" in rental ads anymore. You don't find so
many cases where female heads of households are charged more for
rent than male headed households. Disparate impact analysis exposes
seemingly "neutral" policies that fall heavier on members
of protected classes. Let's
take the discussion away from race for a minute. Another example of
disparate impact is a requirement that renter applicants must have a
HS diploma (not GED) to apply for subsidized housing. The rule is the
same for everyone, but has a disproportionate impact on many
protected classes who have lower levels of educational opportunity or
learning or developmental disabilities.

A finding that "disparate impact" is not a part of the
Fair Housing Act will
undermine
efforts by the Obama administration to create policies to
"affirmatively further fair housing" though geographic
mobility. The Obama White House has been a champion of the notion
that "Zip code is destiny" which basically says: where
you live determines much about the opportunities you will have to
get ahead in life. Studies (some dating back to the 1970's) seem to
show that lower crime, increased educational opportunities, better
environmental health, and access to employment are all tied to location.

In the Washington Post
this week, Max Ehrenfreund wrote: "...while segregation
between neighborhoods has been steadily decreasing, there are still
many places like Ferguson, Mo. where the economic ramifications of
decades of racially biased business practices and government policies
keep low-income blacks from finding a way out. It's often said
on Martin Luther King Day that the civil rights movement still has
unfinished business, but somehow, the events of the past year seem to
have made that fact especially clear." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/16/wonkbook-martin-luther-kings-warnings-on-inequality-were-ahead-of-his-time/Predictably these two
different ideas about what constitutes "discrimination" has
political dimensions. The Court is not expected to rule before late
June. There's much more on the case and the principle of disparate impact at here

Local presence for hearing on Inclusive Communities "Eric and Vonda Williams will speak about their experiences alongside others who will urge the court not to scale back protections under the Fair Housing Act. Also traveling to Washington is Diana Patton, vice president, chief operating officer, and general counsel for the Toledo Fair Housing Center." Nice story about the case and nice photos.http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/2015/01/21/Area-couple-to-speak-on-Fair-Housing-Act.html